Effect of different intercrops on growth and yield attributes of american cotton under dryland condition

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(4): 754-761

International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences
ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 6 Number 4 (2017) pp. 754-761
Journal homepage:

Original Research Article

/>
Effect of Different Intercrops on Growth and Yield Attributes of
American Cotton under Dryland Condition
Ravindra Kumar1, A.B. Turkhede1, R.K. Nagar1 and Anil Nath2*
1

Department of Agronomy, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola,
Maharastra–444 104, India
2
Department of Agronomy,G.B.P.U.A. & T., Pantnagar,UK–263145, India
*Corresponding author
ABSTRACT

Keywords
Intercrops, Growth
and Yield attribute,
Dryland

Article Info
Accepted:
06 March 2017
Available Online:
10 April 2017

A field experiment was conducted to find out the effect of different intercrops on growth
and yield attributes of American cotton under dryland condition during kharif season of
2014-15 at the farm of AICRP for Dryland Agriculture, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi
Vidyapeeth, Akola (Maharashtra). The experiment was laid out in randomized block
design, replicated thrice with eleven treatments. Maximum plant height (71.23 cm), leaf
area (1462 cm2) and leaf area index (0.81) were recorded in cotton + clusterbean
intercropping system than other cropping system. While maximum number of monopodial
(2.33), number of sympodial (15.33), number of functional leaves (46.69), total dry matter
accumulation (70.86 g), number of picked bolls per plant (8.93), boll weight (2.88 g), seed
cotton yield plant-1 (26.51g) and Seed cotton yield (1266 kg ha-1) were recorded
significantly in sole cotton. Seed cotton equivalent yield (1958 kg ha -1) and land equivalent
ratio (1.46) was recorded highest in cotton + cowpea.

Introduction
Cotton (Gossypium sp.) is one of the most
important fibre and cash crop in India belongs
to Malvaceae family and known as “King of
Fiber” and “White gold” plays a prominent
role in the rural, national and international
economy. It is grown mostly for fibre used in
the manufacture of cloths for mankind. In
recent years, cotton apparels are being
preferred to the synthetic ones due to the
increasing the health consciousness among
the people. Besides fibre, cotton is also valued
for its oil (15 - 20%) which are used as
vegetable oil and soap industries and cotton
seed cake is very protein rich cotton seed cake
used as cattle feed and as manure which

contain 6.4, 2.9 and 2.2 per cent N, P and K,
respectively. India is a major producer of
cotton. India stands first position in area and
third in its production. In India it is grown
over an area of 115.13 lakh hectares with
production of 375 lakh bales and productivity
of 489 kg/ha (Anonymous, 2013).
Intensification of cotton based cropping
system with intercrops was successful as a
components in the system have different
nutrient and moisture requirement, varied
feeding zones in the soil profile, differential
growth duration for enabling the utilization of
natural
resources
optimally
(Sankaranarayanan
et
al.,
2011).
754


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(4): 754-761

Intercropping has been recognized as
potentially beneficial and economic system of
crop production. Similarly intercropping is
one of the ways to increase the cropping

intensity and resource utilization (Harisudan
et al., 2008). Usually a yield advance occurs
as component crop differ in their use of
resources when they are grown in
combination, they are able to component each
other and make better use of resources.

located at north latitude of 220 42' and East
longitudes of 770 02’ and at an altitude of
307.42 m above mean sea level. The soil of
experimental plot was clayey in texture,
slightly alkaline in reaction, medium in
organic carbon and in available nitrogen and
low in available phosphorus but having fairly
rich status of available potassium. During
kharif season of 2014-15, the total rainfall
received was 588.2 mm in 32 rainy days. The
experiment was laid out in randomized block
design, replicated thrice with eleven
treatments viz., Sole cotton, Sole greengram,
Sole blackgram, Sole soybean, Sole
clusterbean, Sole cowpea, Cotton +
greengram (1:1), Cotton + blackgram (1:1),
Cotton + soybean (1:1), Cotton + clusterbean
(1:1) and Cotton + cowpea (1:1). Five plants
in each treatment in the net plot area were
selected at random and tagged for biometric
observations. While taking observations, five
plants from sampling rows were pulled off in
each treatment plot for recording dry matter

production. The intercrops were incorporated
within the interspaces after picking of pods of
intercrops. The statistical analysis was done
as per procedure suggested by Gomez and
Gomez (1984).

Due to slow growing nature of cotton much of
the vacant interspaces remains utilized during
initial stages of the crop growth. This
situation offers ample scope for raising
intercrops (Nehra et al., 1990). Similarly, this
situation can be advantageously exploited for
intercropping for short. Due to the early
maturing pulses like blackgram, greengram,
and clusterbean, which improve the fertility
status of soil (Muruganandam, 1984).
Intercropping with the crops provides the
insurance against the inclement weather
situation
and
consequent
crops
(Balasubramanian, 1987; Sivakumar, 2003)
observed increase in productivity with higher
market value and enhanced profitability when
pulses were intercropped with cotton.
Intercropping of legumes is an important
aspect for biological farming system not only
for weed control, but also in reducing the
leaching of nutrients, pest control and in

reducing soil erosion (Prabukumar and
Uthayakumar, 2006). Keeping all the views in
mind an experiment was conducted to find out
the effect of different intercrops on growth
and yield attributes on American cotton under
dryland condition.

Results and Discussion
Growth attributes
In this experiment, intercropping with
different crops shows that growth attributes
viz. (plant height, number of sympodial,
number of functional leaves and total dry
matter accumulation) of cotton were
influenced significantly but number of
monopodial, Leaf area and leaf area index of
cotton were not influenced significantly.
Maximum plant height (71.23 cm), Leaf area
(1462 cm2) and leaf area index (0.81) were
recorded in cotton + clusterbean intercropping
system than other cropping system. Tallness
in the plots of intercrops of clusterbean and

Materials and Methods
A field experiment was conducted during
kharif season of 2014 at the farm of AICRP
for Dryland Agriculture, Dr. Panjabrao
Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola
(Maharashtra) which is geographically
755

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(4): 754-761

cowpea might be associated with competitive
effect for space, moisture, nutrient and light
(due to Annidation process) further
accelerated the phototropism and thereby
increased plant height of cotton. Similarly,
observations of increased plant height in
cotton due to different intercrops were
reported by Wankhade et al., (2000), Deoche
(2001), Kalyankar (2001), Hallikeri et al.,
(2005), Srivastava et al., (2010) and Satish et
al., (2012) and Shankarnarayan et al., (2012).
Whereas, sole cotton recorded significantly
maximum number of monopodial (2.33),
number of sympodial (15.33), number of
functional leaves (46.69) and total dry matter
accumulation (70.86 g) over intercropping
system. The lesser number of monopodial,
sympodial, number of functional leaves and
total dry matter accumulation in the treatment
plots of intercrop were due to competition of
these intercrops for growth factors along with
the crop of cotton. These results are in
conformity with the work of Wankhade et al.,
(2000), Deoche (2001), Kalyankar (2001),
Hallikeri et al., (2005) and Shrivastava et al.,
(2010) and Sankaranarayanan et al., (2011).

were at par recorded greater production of
seed cotton yield per plant. Thus,
intercropping with cotton was successful as a
component because of cotton has different
nutrient and moisture requirements, varied
feeding zones in the soil profile, differential
growth duration for enabling the utilization of
natural resources optimally. Number of bolls
plant-1, seed cotton yield plant-1 was highest
in sole cotton than intercropped with
greengram, blackgram, soybean, vegetables
likes clusterbean, cowpea, etc. as well as
weight of seed cotton per boll was not
significantly influenced by intercropping also
reported by Wankhade et al., (2000), Deoche
(2001), Khan et al., (2001), Sanjay et al.,
(2003),
Halemani
et
al.,
(2004),
Venkataraman (2008), Shrivastava et al.,
(2010) Satish et al., (2012) and Khargkharate
et al., (2014).
Effect on yield
Treatment sole cotton recorded significantly
higher seed cotton yield (1266 kg ha-1) than
the rest of treatments because of number of
rows per plot were higher than intercropping

treatments, while various intercropping
treatments recorded lower seed cotton yield
than Sole cotton due to less no. of rows to the
sole cotton plot. However, among the
treatments of various intercropping system,
cotton + clusterbean (1:1) recorded
significantly higher seed cotton yield (1139
kg ha-1) and found being at par with rest of
the treatments of intercropping. Due to wider
row spacing of cotton 90 x 20 cm and
duration of the different vegetables intercrops,
none of the above crops competed with the
main crop of cotton during the growth and
development. This might be attributed to the
uniform duration of these intercrops. These
results are in the line of work reported by
Rami Reddy (2005), Hallikeri et al., (2007),
Rekha et al., (2008), Mankar and Nawlakhe
(2009), Sankaranarayanan et al., (2012) and
Khargkharate et al., (2014).

Yield attributes
Sole cotton recorded significantly higher
number of picked bolls per plant than the rest
of the treatments. Treatments of various
cotton + intercrops viz. (cotton + greengram,
Cotton + blackgram, Cotton + Soybean,
Cotton + Clusterbean, and Cotton + Cowpea)
were being at par produced comparable
number of picked bolls per plant.

Mean boll weight was (2.86 g), the boll
weight was not affected significantly due to
different treatments of intercrop.
Treatment of sole cotton resulted in higher
production of seed cotton yield per plant over
other treatments. Treatments of intercrop of
cotton + intercrops (i.e. greengram,
blackgram, clusterbean, soybean and cowpea)
756


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(4): 754-761

Table.1 Plant height (cm), no. of monopodial plant-1, no. of sympodial plant-1, no. of functional leaves plant-1, leaf area index and total
dry matter accumulation plant-1 (g) of cotton as influenced by different treatments

Treatments

T1 - Sole Cotton

Plant
Height
(cm)

No. of
No. of
monopodial sympodial

No. of
functional

leaves

Leaf area
(cm2)

Leaf area
index

Total dry matter
accumulation (g)

65.25

2.33

15.33

46.69

1410.67

0.78

70.86

T2 - Sole greengram

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

T3 - Sole blackgram

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

T4 - Sole soybean

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

T5 - Sole clusterbean

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

T6 - Sole cowpea

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

T7 - Cotton + Greengram (1:1)

66.52

2.00

14.53

44.58

1437.33

0.79

69.67

T8 - Cotton + Blackgram (1:1)

67.06

1.67

14.67

44.95

1460.00

0.81

69.67

T9 - Cotton + Soybean (1:1)

64.06

1.67

14.49

45.14

1443.33

0.80

65.33

T10 - Cotton + Clusterbean (1:1)

71.23

1.67

14.69

44.65

1462.00

0.81

70.85

T11 - Cotton + Cowpea (1:1)

70.37

1.67

14.67

45.25

1454.33

0.81

69.37

S.E.(m)+

0.16

0.16

0.29

0.36

26.99

0.01

0.66

C.D. at 5 %

0.51

NS

0.85

1.12

NS

NS

2.09

757


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(4): 754-761

Table.2 Number of picked bolls plant-1, boll weight and seed cotton yield plant-1 of cotton as influenced by different treatments
Seed cotton Seed cotton
yield
yield plant-1
(kg ha-1)
(g)

Intercrop
yield
(kg ha-1)

Seed cotton
equivalent
yield
(kg ha-1)

Land
Equivalent

Ratio

1266

-

1266

1.00

-

-

2090

880

1.00

-

-

-

493

787

1.00

-

-

-

-

1086

915

1.00

T5 - Sole clusterbean

-

-

-

-

3346

1409

1.00

T6 - Sole cowpea

-

-

-

-

3466

1460

1.00

T7 - Cotton + Greengram (1:1)

7.40

2.88

22.36

1048

872

1484

1.25

T8 - Cotton + Blackgram (1:1)

7.60

2.87

22.41

1039

243

1494

1.30

T9 - Cotton + Soybean (1:1)

7.29

2.87

21.89

992

492

1406

1.23

T10 - Cotton + Clusterbean (1:1)

7.46

2.87

22.40

1139

1881

1931

1.46

T11 - Cotton + Cowpea (1:1)

7.79

2.87

22.90

1114

2004

1958

1.46

S.E.(m)+

0.18

0.02

0.51

40.3

-

46.1

0.05

C.D. at 5 %

0.57

NS

1.61

126

-

136.1

0.13

Number of
picked bolls
plant-1

Boll
weight (g)

8.93

2.88

26.51

T2 - Sole greengram

-

-

T3 - Sole blackgram

-

T4 - Sole soybean

Treatments
T1 - Sole Cotton

758


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(4): 754-761

Intercrop cotton + cowpea and cotton +
clusterbean were being at par recorded
significantly higher seed cotton equivalent
yield than the rest of the treatments (Tables 1
and 2). In general, the trend of cotton seed
equivalent yield in different treatments plots
of intercrop was consistent (Fig. 1). However,
seed cotton equivalent yield increased due to
different intercrops over sole crop of cotton.
This is attributed to better productivity of
variety AKH-9916 of cotton and intercrops of
cowpea
and
clusterbean
and
their
remunerative market prices. When cotton

intercropped with blackgram, greengram
soybean, clusterbean, etc. the higher average
seed cotton yield equivalent recorded in
intercropping system than sole cotton because
of yield of intercrops were higher than their
sole treatments, the marker price was also
higher and Clusterbean, greengram and
cowpea were used as vegetable purpose so,
also reported by the workers by Prasad et al.,
(2000) at New Delhi, Chellaiah and
Gopalswamy (2001) at Srivilliputtur (T.N.),
Kalyankar (2001) at Parbhani, Nandini and

Chellamuthu
(2004)
at
Dharwad,
Venkataraman, (2008) at Kovilpatti (T.N.).
Effect on land equivalent ratio
Treatments of intercrops of cotton +
clusterbean and cotton + cowpea were at par
recorded greater values of land equivalent
ratio and significantly superior than rest of the
intercropping treatments. However, cotton +
greengram and cotton + blackgram and cotton
+ soybean were at par than sole cotton and
sole cotton recorded lowest value of land
equivalent ratio. It indicated that whether
association is more beneficial than sole
treatment and also indicated which crop is not

suitable for association so that the association
of such crops may be avoided. Singh et al.,
(2000), Chittapur (2004), Nandini and
Chellamuthu (2004), Rami Reddy and Shaik
Mohammad (2009) Velmurugan et al., (2012
and 2013) were reported that the LER was
higher under intercropping system than their
respective sole crops.

759


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(4): 754-761

C. Patil and S.S. Patil. 2007.
Intercropping of cotton with vegetables
as the profitable cropping system under
rainfed conditions of north Karnataka.
University of Agricultural Sciences,
Dharwad, Karnataka (INDIA).
Kalyankar, G.K. 2001. Fertilizer management
for cotton based cropping system under
rainfed condition. M.Sc.(Agric.) Thesis
submitted to Marathwada Agriculture
University, Parbhani (India).
Khan, M.B., Mahbbob Akhtar and Abdul
Khalia. 2001. Effect of planting patterns
and different intercropping systems on
the productivity of cotton (G. hirsutum)
under irrigated condition of Faisalabad.

Int. J. Agri. and Soil, 3(4): 432-435.
Khargkharate, V.K., G.L. Kadam, A.D.
Pandagale, V.B. Awasarmal and S.S.
Rathod. 2014. Studies on kharif legume
intercropping with Bt. cotton under
rainfed conditions. J. Cotton Res. Dev.,
28(2): 243-246.
Mankar, D.D. and S.M. Nawlakhe. 2009.
Yield attributes and yield of cotton
(main crop) and greengram (intercrop)
and quality of cotton as influenced by
INM under cotton + greengram
intercropping. J. Soils and Crops, 19(2):
315-319.
Murganandan, C.K. 1984. M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis
Tamil Nadu Agric. Univ., Coimbtore,
india.
Nandini, S. and V. Chellamuthu. 2004.
Relative performance of cotton cultivars
under sole and intercropping situation in
the coastal region of Karaikal.
International symposium on “Strategies
for sustainable cotton production - A
global vision” 2. Crop Production, 2325 November, 2004, University of
Agricultural
sciences,
Dharwad,
Karnataka (India): 235-238.
Nehra, D.S., et al. 1990. J. Cotton Res. Dev.,
4(1): 128-129.

Prabukumar, Uthayakumar, B. 2006. Use of

References
Anonymous. 2013. The cotton corporation
India
Lt.
corp.
gov.in/statistics.aspx htt.
Balasubramanian, T.N. 1987. Ph.d Thesis.
Tamil Nadu Agric. Univ., Coimbatore,
India.
Chellaiah, N. and G.N. Gopalaswamy. 2001.
Effect of intercropping and foliar
nutrition on the productivity of summer
irrigated cotton. Madras Agric. J.,
87(4): 267-270.
Chittapur, B.M. 2004. Cotton based cropping
systems for sustainable productivity.
International symposium on “Strategies
for sustainable cotton production - A
global vision” 2. crop production,
University of Agricultural sciences,
Dharwad, Karnataka (INDIA): 45-55.
Deoche, S.A. 2001. Studies on intercropping
in extra early hirsutum cotton genotype
AKH-081. M.Sc. (Agric.) Thesis
submitted to Dr. PDKV Akola.
Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. 1984.
Statistical procedure for Agricultural
Research. An International Rice

Research Institute Book. A Willey Inter
Science Publication, New York.
Halemani, H.L., S.S. Haikeri, S.S. Nooli,
R.A. Nandagavi and M.T. Dodamani,
2004. Studies on intercropping of
pigeonpea on the growth, yield and
economics
of
rainfed
cotton.
International symposium on “Strategies
for sustainable cotton production -A
global vision” 2. Crop production, 2325 November, 2004, University of
Agricultural
sciences,
Dharwad,
Karnataka (India): 229-231.
Hallikeri, S.S., H.L. Halemani and R.A.
Nandagavi, 2005. Income maximization
through trap crop intercropping in
rainfed cotton. J. Maharashtra Agric.
Univ., 30(1): 21-23.
Hallikeri, S.S., Aladakatti, Y.R. Basanagouda,
760


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(4): 754-761

organics for crops for crop production
under rainfed situation-A review. Agric.

Rev., 27(3): 208-215.
Raghu Rami Reddy, P. 2005. Planting
techniques for intercropping studies in
cotton. Ph.D. thesis submitted to
Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural
University.
Raghu Rami Reddy, P. and Shaik
Mohammad. 2009. Evaluation of cotton
(Gossypium
hirsutum)
based
intercropping system through different
approaches under rainfed conditions.
Indian J. Agri. Sci., 79(3): 210-214.
Sanjay, M.T., V.B. Nadagouda, B.T. Pujari,
A. Narayangouda and Somshekar. 2003.
Intercropping in short duration compact
cotton Anjali. Crop Res. Hissar., 26(2):
224-225.
Sankaranarayanan, K., P. Nalayini and C.S.
Praharaj. 2012. Multi-tier cropping
system to enhance resource utilization,
profitablity and sustainability of Bt
cotton
(Gossypium
hirsutum)
production system. Indian J. Agri. Sci.,
82(12): 1044–50.
Satish, P. Raja, V. Shaik Mohammad and V.
Sailaja. 2012. Effect of intercropping on

growth and seed cotton yield yield of
Bt. Cotton with different planting
patterns. J. Res., ANGRAU. 40(1): 2125.

Shrivastava, G.K., R. Lakpale, P.S. Rathiya,
S.S. Bargali. 2010. Effect of nutrient
with FYM on biomass production and
economics under hybrid cotton-soybean
intercropping system. J. Plant Develop.
Sci., 2(1): 9-18.
Singh, J., M.V. Venugopalan and N.D.
Mannikar. 2000. Soil fertility and crop
productivity changes due to cotton
based cropping system under rainfed
condition. J. Indian Society of Soil Sci.,
48(2): 282-287.
Sree Rekha, M., G. Nageswara Rao and S.
Dharua. 2008. Effect of legume
intercrops on yield and profitability of
rainfed cotton in vertisols. J. Cotton
Res. Dev., 22: 225-260.
Velmurgan, R., Naik and Vankudhotu
Ravinder. 2012. Cotton-Cluster bean
intercropping system for better farming,
Bioinfolet– A Quarterly. J. Life Sci.,
9(4B): 33-34.
Venkataraman, N.S. 2008. Studies on crop
diversification through cotton-based
intercropping system under rainfed
Vertisol. J. Cotton Res. Develop., 22(1):

50-52.
Wankhade, S.T., A.B. Turkhede, V.M.
Solanke, S.D. Malvi and R.N. Katkar.
2000. Effect of intercropping and yield
of cotton. Cotton Res., 19(3): 409-413.

How to cite this article:
Ravindra Kumar, A.B. Turkhede, R.K. Nagar and Anil Nath. 2017. Effect of Different
Intercrops on Growth and Yield Attributes of American Cotton under Dryland Condition.
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci. 6(4): 754-761. doi: />
761